California and the World

WASHINGTON, June 17 — If you want to see a clear example of the influenc6 of domestic politics on United States foreigR policy, consider the effect of California's Proposition 13 on this year's Federal foreign aid budget, which goes to the floor of the House in a few days.

Despite all the talk of U.S.‐SovIet relations and new military technologies — the cruise missile, the neutron warhead, etc. — East‐West and Atlantic relations are increasingly influenced by North‐South relations and by trade and foreign aid, where the mood’ of the House can be decisive.

Members of the House, who are up for re:election this year, have not failed to notice the 2‐1 vote for cutting property taxes by over 50 percent in California. In the last 10 days they have made sharp reduction8 in the appropriations for the Labor and Health, Education and Welfare Departments, and have even cut their own legislative appropriations by 5 percent. A good. case can'be made for these decisions.

The temptation to make drastic cuts in the foreign aid budget after Proposition 1‐3 is even more severe. Nobody ever lost an election by voting to keep money at home, but there is an obvious conflict here between the political interests of Congressmen and the for‘ eign policy interests of the nation.

The Carter Administration has also heard the news from California, but it. is still asking for $1.9 billion in bilateral development assistance abroad,. and $3.5 billion in multi‐lateral development through the World Bank and regional development banks, for a total.of about $5.9 billion.

The House Appropriations Commit‐. tee has already cut $1.09 billion from these two types of foreign economic assistance — $876 million in multilateral aid and $130 million in bilateral • aid — but the critical battle will be on the House floor over a series of amendments, including the following, to reduce the foreign aid budget much more drastically:

4411‐Ong Amendment. Representative Clarence Long of Maryland has an amendment that would reduce the appropriations for the international development banks by an additional $584 million.

qBeard Amendment. Representative Robin Beard of Tennessee has an amendment that would prohibit the use of any United States funds from being used “directly or indirectly” to support the governments of Cambodia, Vietnam, Laos, or Uganda. This seems reasonable enough, but adoption of such an amendment would virtually end United States participation in the World Bank, since the bank's charter forbids it from accepting any funds with such restrictions.

All these amendments had their followers long before Proposition 13 came out of California, and deserve serious consideration, but in relation to Proposition 1, which is the vital interests of the United States.

Foreign aid is not a charitable exercise like the New York Times Christmas Fund for “The 100 Neediest Cases.” It goes to the world struggles developing in the poor nations in the last quarter of the century. The major confrontations between Washington and Moscow are no longer taking place. over the great industrial complexes ol the Ruhr, the Rhineland, and Japan, but in the Middle East, where weapons are clearly important, and in Africa, Southeast Asia and Latin America, where money, trade, economic assistance, health, education, and population control are likely to be more important than cruise missiles.

The Congress has been right to concentrate on the balance of power and on the industrial power centers since World War 11 — “billions for bombers and missiles” has always been a popular slogan on The Hill — but new battlefields are now emerging.

The United States now depends on developing countries for 45 percent of its oil, 85 percent• of its bauxite, 93 percent of its tin, 59 percent of its zinc ore and 36 percent of its iron ore.

United States trade with these poor developing countries is increasingly important. For example, according to official figures here, even it 1975 the United States exported $29 billion in goods to the non‐oil developing countries—three times the 1970 total, three times our exports to Japan, and $3 billion more than our exports to Europe. The White House estimate is that “one out of every four American farm jobs and one out of every eight manufacturing jobs now depend on the sale of American goods abrbad,” and that “two million American jobs are now dependent on third world exports.” ‘

So there is more to debate in the House in these coming days than the property tax revolt in California, important as that is. There is a policy to be decided for a changing and different world. World population today is roughly 4 billion. By the year 2000 it will be 6 billion, 87 percent of which will be living in the poor countries.

Unless this can be controlled, all bets on bombers and missiles may be irrelevant to the race between food and population, which is a foreign aid, not a military, question,

“If a free society cannot help the many who are poor,” President Kennedy said in his inaugural address, lit cannot save the film Who are rich.”

We are continually improving the quality of our text archives. Please send feedback, error reports,
and suggestions to archive_feedback@nytimes.com.

A version of this archives appears in print on June 18, 1978, on Page E19 of the New York edition with the headline: California and the World. Order Reprints|Today's Paper|Subscribe